On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 12:05:23 +1200, Peter Reutemann quoted:
'Bitbucket, once one of the largest Mercurial repository hosting sites, said Tuesday it plans to remove Mercurial features and repositories from its platform on June 1, 2020.'
Was it really that long ago it was posting blog entries <https://www.atlassian.com/blog/software-teams/mercurial-vs-git-why-mercurial> on how Mercurial was so much better than Git? (Link found from this article <https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/21/bitbucket_mercurial_repositories/> which manages to include a relevant limerick in its subhead.)
'"Another [poor] aspect of bitbucket dropping mercurial support and deleting all the old repositories in 2020: all yt pull request discussions from before 2017 are going to be deleted. There's valuable context for how the code got written in those discussions."'
Which is why I am really not keen on incorporating GitHubisms into my own repos, just for example.
'For those of you affected by this, you can consider a number of platforms including SourceForge to host and manage your repositories.'
When somebody is suggesting that SourceForge might be a better option, does that count as a low blow? ;)